Would An Austrian Germany Be More Peaceful?

Austria was manipulated into starting WWI by Kaiser Wilhelm II.

Yeah no. Austria initiated the 1914 Crisis. German military officials did encourage Austria to take a hard line out of the belief that delaying the Entente-CP conflict would result in an unbeatable Russia, so it could be said that they encouraged the great war, but Austria is the one that came up with the ultimatums. As for Wilhelm himself, he believed the Austro-Serbian conflict would remain a local affair and not turn into a general war, so if you're gonna blame someone in the German government it wouldn't be him.
 
Yeah no. Austria initiated the 1914 Crisis. German military officials did encourage Austria to take a hard line out of the belief that delaying the Entente-CP conflict would result in an unbeatable Russia, so it could be said that they encouraged the great war, but Austria is the one that came up with the ultimatums. As for Wilhelm himself, he believed the Austro-Serbian conflict would remain a local affair and not turn into a general war, so if you're gonna blame someone in the German government it wouldn't be him.
Even then they encouraged austrea exactly becuse they thot Russia woulnt risk a war until 1917 and don't expect Russia (galvanised by the very militant former alishion president of France ) to escalate the crisis especaly as Briton was delberitly giveing mix signals as to whether it would stay neutral or not. Aka everybody was equally guilty in starting ww1.
 
Prussia's militarist tendencies are infamous. There's the old joke that they were "an army than inherited a country".

Then it is quite ironic, that a militaristic Prussia/Germany fought less wars in 200 years of militarism than in the 90 years before militarism. And less wars than oh so peaceful Austria.

Prussia famously unified Germany through "blood and iron".

Because a peaceful unification wasn't possible - thanks to Austria and its balkan adventures...

West Germany's first Chancellor, Konrad Adenauer, squarely blamed the Prussians for the rise of the Nazis.

Well Adenauer was't a saint and made many mistakes. Mistakes which are the foundation for Germanys systemic problems today.
The blame for the rise of nazism can be found in the treaty of Versailes and the great depression.
If rumors are true, one of the reasons Adenauer blocked an early reunification of Germany is because he was a catholic and didn't want more protestants.

Depends what is the POD. If rise of Prussia to great power status is prevented then likely yes. Austrian expansion was directed to Balkans and Italy, while Prussia expanded into Poland. Partition of PLC benefited mainly Prussia and were done, because there was need to compensate Prussians Austrian and Russian gains at cost of Ottomans, to keep balance of power between these three-for obvious reasons Prussia could not be given Ottoman territory.
Without strong Prussia there would not be such need. If PLC survives, there is no border between Germany nd Russia, that means conflict between these two is less likely.

>THE Main Beneficiary< of the Partition of PLC was Russia! More than half of its territory was annexed by Russia! And it was Austrias chancellor Kaunitz who first proposed that Prussia should annexing Courland (and Westprussia aka Royal Prussia) for the return of Silesia.

Austria was aggressive but Germany encouraged Austria to be even more so in her demands on Bosnia. I would also put Russia in the aggressive camp, but I think it is undue to say all involved were like that. Bosnia was more than conciliatory.

Germanys mistake was supporting Austria "no matter what". Wilhelm II even telegamed to Vienna after Serbia accepted all but one demand of the ultimatum that "there was no reason for war anymore"
Bosnia was annexed by Austria 1908.
Russia and France mobilized BEFORE Germany.

France did nothing more than back her ally to stop a super Germany forming,

Before WW1 there was no possibility for the fomation of a "super Germany". Austria-Hungary was strong and stable.

Britain was so hesitant against going to war it actually made war more likely.

Then why was there an Triple Entente?!
 
>THE Main Beneficiary< of the Partition of PLC was Russia! More than half of its territory was annexed by Russia! And it was Austrias chancellor Kaunitz who first proposed that Prussia should annexing Courland (and Westprussia aka Royal Prussia) for the return of Silesia.

No, just no.
Before Partitions Russians had whole PLC under their control . After partitions-only the underdeveloped and sparsely populated eastern areas, which look impressive only on the map, while Austrians and Prussians took the richest provinces. Russia was big looser of Partitions and get mostly troubles from it.
 
The Prussia v Austria leadership question lends itself somewhat to a mid 1800s POD.

At this point Austria, would not be able to break Prussian power and lead a United Germany. Austria’s policy was to prevent Prussia from closing the deal and also to embroil the Confederation into assuring its position in Italy (especially) and the Balkans.

If Austria were able to outmaneuver Prussia and keep it inside a reformed Confederation in some form of union pact with the empire as a whole then there wouldn’t be a German nation state per se; just a union of German states.

This union (which has 2 Great Powers within it) may come into conflict with France over control of Italy or with Russia over the Balkans—a situation not dissimilar to the OTL Dual Alliance.

So perhaps this is a non answer but I believe the power dynamics among and between France, Germany and Russia will be similar to OTL and that eventually there will be a general war.
 
No, just no.
Before Partitions Russians had whole PLC under their control . After partitions-only the underdeveloped and sparsely populated eastern areas, which look impressive only on the map, while Austrians and Prussians took the richest provinces. Russia was big looser of Partitions and get mostly troubles from it.

That the PLC was under Russias control may be true till 1764, when they supported the election of Poniatowski as King of the PLC.
Poniatowski, however, proved not as loyal and submissive as the Czarina had hoped. After a short time, he began to undertake far-reaching reforms. In order to guarantee its ability to act after the election as the new king, the Reichstag decided on 20 December 1764 to transform itself into a general confederation, which was supposed to last only for the duration of the interregnum. This meant that future Reichstag were exempted from the liberum veto and majority decisions (pluralis votorum) were sufficient for a decision. In this way, the Polish state was strengthened. However, Catherine II did not want to give up the benefits of the permanent blockade of political life in Poland, the so-called "Polish anarchy", and was looking for ways to prevent a system capable of functioning and reform.

So Russia had to decide between losing control over the PLC or military intervention.
 
That the PLC was under Russias control may be true till 1764, when they supported the election of Poniatowski as King of the PLC.
Poniatowski, however, proved not as loyal and submissive as the Czarina had hoped. After a short time, he began to undertake far-reaching reforms. In order to guarantee its ability to act after the election as the new king, the Reichstag decided on 20 December 1764 to transform itself into a general confederation, which was supposed to last only for the duration of the interregnum. This meant that future Reichstag were exempted from the liberum veto and majority decisions (pluralis votorum) were sufficient for a decision. In this way, the Polish state was strengthened. However, Catherine II did not want to give up the benefits of the permanent blockade of political life in Poland, the so-called "Polish anarchy", and was looking for ways to prevent a system capable of functioning and reform.

So Russia had to decide between losing control over the PLC or military intervention.
Catherine herself initially allowed reforms and even enforced some (like emancipation of dissidents). Situation went outside her control, but that was fault of Poniatowski's personality, his conflicts with Familia, and, above all, pride and phobias of Catherine not-so-Great. Successfull reforms of PLC was more dangerous to Prussia than to Russia, because strenghtened PLC would want back Royal, and possibly also Ducal Prussia, while retaking eastern Belarus would be far from top priority.
 
Catherine herself initially allowed reforms and even enforced some (like emancipation of dissidents). Situation went outside her control, but that was fault of Poniatowski's personality, his conflicts with Familia, and, above all, pride and phobias of Catherine not-so-Great. Successfull reforms of PLC was more dangerous to Prussia than to Russia, because strenghtened PLC would want back Royal, and possibly also Ducal Prussia, while retaking eastern Belarus would be far from top priority.

Yes Cathrine supported reforms in the beginning but they got further then was got for russian hegemony in the PLC. Because of this she supported the partition!

And reforms were not that dangerous for Prussia at the time.
Royal Prussia at the time wasn't part of Prussia but the personal fief of the King of Poland-Lithunia.
Ducal Prussia was a sovereign territory since 1657 (at this point in time for more than 100 years).
Russian and austrian landgrabs were mutch more recent.
 
Austrian Germany means Grobdeutschland. OTL Germany + Cisleithania would have been enormous power. If ATL Germany leaves Balkans for Russia, they could be allied with Russia. Probably this would be best for both countries. Germanys supports Russia for Balkans and Asia. Russia supports Germany againist Anglo-French-Italian group.
 

longsword14

Banned
I think it's a safe assumption that Austria wouldn't have taken Alsace-Lorraine from France,
Alsace Lorraine is not the only reason why Franco - German hostility existed, or would continue to exit in another TL.
It was the southern members of the German coalition headed by Prussia that demanded that aanexation.
 
Austria started WWI because the country felt that it was losing Great Power status and wanted to prove it could still push little guys around.


What is Austrian Germany like? If we're sticking to a simple PoD of an Austrian Germany following the defeat of Prussia, then it wouldn't be a formally unified polity at all.

At most it'd be the remainder of Germany, sans Prussia, as protectorates of Austria and proceeding to contribute money to the coffers of the President of the German Confederation (ie the German Emperor), increased troop obligations of the various German states to the President of the Confederation, monetary union, and common tariff policy. Meanwhile Schleswig, Holstein, and Prussian Rhineland-Westphalia (divided into two or three other states) would be made into small Hapsburg polities (and loyal votes for the Austrian Emperor in the German Diet) and the leaders of Prussia's allies will be forced to resign in favor of their successors... who would owe their thrones to the Austrian Emperor and thus be inclined to vote the Emperor's way.


upload_2019-7-23_7-38-50.png


France has Luxembourg, as Austria doesn't oppose the purchase.
Austria, having defeated Italy as well, retains Friuli.
Bosnia is a protectorate with a Hapsburg Grand Duke, not an annexed part of Austria.​
 
This is problem with Greater Austria. If you just leave those none-German areas nationalism will tear it apart. The greater aim would be to create a federal European superstate encompassing the Balkans and Eastern Europe giving legitimacy to rule those areas. This would only require war the Ottomans and the Russians. Mind you picking when to start the wars is important. Don’t really want to get France and Britain dragged in or maybe the Austrians would. Annex all of Belgium.

It’s really down to the chancellor shaping foreign policy and politics within the nation.
 
This is problem with Greater Austria. If you just leave those none-German areas nationalism will tear it apart. The greater aim would be to create a federal European superstate encompassing the Balkans and Eastern Europe giving legitimacy to rule those areas. This would only require war the Ottomans and the Russians. Mind you picking when to start the wars is important. Don’t really want to get France and Britain dragged in or maybe the Austrians would. Annex all of Belgium.

It’s really down to the chancellor shaping foreign policy and politics within the nation.

The UK manages to include Scotland. Canada manages to include Quebec etc. The idea that every nation can get and deserves independence isn't one that needs to be cemented.
 
Top